is this... THE GUERILLA 35?

JHouser said:
But theoretically if the adapter loss was half a stop just add that to your taking lens aperture. This obviously would be added to your camera's aperture when zoomed in F2.0 and that is the total stop loss including camera lens.
Click to expand...
Could you clarify that with an example using typical numbers?
 
From what I can tell (assuming the achromatic is relatively lossless), there would be 1/2 of a stop lost from the GG, 1/2-2/3'' of a stop lost from a maximum aperture of f2.0 instead of f1.6, then whatever the lens loses. (f1.4 losing one stop of light over f1).

So, with lenses at f1.4, I guess there'd be about 2-2.5 stops of light lost. I think shooting at f1.4 is almost impossible, but I ordered a 35mm f1.4 lens so that may provide a deep enough depth of focus for useability.

Not terrible, but the dvx is like 320ISO or whatever in progressive scan (at best) so this would be like shooting at 100 ISO. Ouch.... A lot of Hollywood movies are shoot at 320, even 500ISO and most 16mm film is the same stock. Still, so long as you light your interiors well, this shouldn't be entirely awful.
 
NBCshooter said:
Could you clarify that with an exampl,e using typical numbers?
Click to expand...

No, as I mentioned, we have not run comprehensive tests, so we are not ready for a statement. When I start talking numbers, people start taking it as fact. There are plenty of people on here who can explain it to you.
 
JHouser said:
we have not run comprehensive tests
Click to expand...
True! Even after the most comprehensive tests, one camera has a different response to a screen than another camera from the same manufacturer (same model) Light loss is more or less meaningless (1/2 stop, one stop, who cares?). "LOOKS" is all that maters and I love the look of G35! There! Way to go Jonathan!
 
dose the g35 use gg or a focus screen? I know dan's uses a focus screen its sweet Im going to try and make mine with a medium format sreen that I got it cheap off ebay....probably srcatched haha.
 
Policar said:
So, with lenses at f1.4, I guess there'd be about 2-2.5 stops of light lost. I think shooting at f1.4 is almost impossible, but I ordered a 35mm f1.4 lens so that may provide a deep enough depth of focus for useability.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that explaination, Policar. However, I tend to disagree with you saying, "shooting at f/1.4 is impossible." I can't WAIT to shoot at f/1.4!
 
JHouser said:
When I start talking numbers, people start taking it as fact.
Click to expand...
I understand your position. I guess Policar explained it above, but I was just looking for more solid information, for example, ". . . although not tested yet, we can say that the combined light loss would be NO LESS than X.X stops due to exisiting constraints of the design." I guess, what I'm asking, all over this forum, is what is the best possible efficiency, given this basic design? No less than 2 f-stops?
 
JHouser said:
Thanks for the kind words guys.
Click to expand...
I am looking forward to your product.
Can you confirm you'll also make camera rods for use with real cine lenses?
thanks for following this forum and answering our collective answers.
 
Once you shoot at f1.4, you'll be dying to shoot with the dvx! It's kind of fun, but it really limits any figure movement or camera movement, even at 50mm. Shooting at f2.8 or f4 should be wonderful, though.
 
yea f1.4 is actually really annoying. I was taking photos of my friends wedding, anf even at 7 feet away youre still choosing between the ears and the nose being in focus....

like policar said, F4 should be awesome.
 
x2mag68 said:
. . . f1.4 is actually really annoying. I was taking photos of my friends wedding, and even at 7 feet away youre still choosing between the ears and the nose being in focus . . .
Click to expand...
GREAT! That's what I've been wanting--RAZOR-thin depth-of-focus!
 
NBCshooter said:
GREAT! That's what I've been wanting--RAZOR-thin depth-of-focus!
Click to expand...

LOL go NBC!!! I'm with ya baby!

Why in God's name would you shoot photo's for a wedding without Flash or strobes?

Sometimes people on here give me a good chuckle....I remember shooting TRIAX rated at 80 ASA....

I mean DAMN...some filters I use take up 1-2 stops.

learn to light folks! Especially if your getting into any flavor of HD. These adapters offer more choices. Don't want shallow DOF, then don't use it. Or rent a varicam or cine alt.
 
Yea but your actors really have to stay on the mark. and unfortunatly the foucus ring on my FD lense is REALLLLLY stiff, so focusing will probably shake the camera during any hand held stuff.
 
esperman said:
LOL go NBC!!! I'm with ya baby!

Why in God's name would you shoot photo's for a wedding without Flash or strobes?

Sometimes people on here give me a good chuckle....I remember shooting TRIAX rated at 80 ASA....

I mean DAMN...some filters I use take up 1-2 stops.

learn to light folks! Especially if your getting into any flavor of HD. These adapters offer more choices. Don't want shallow DOF, then don't use it. Or rent a varicam or cine alt.
Click to expand...


because i use natural light. and it was outdoor and the photos came out beautiful. they were much happier with my pic than the pros.
 
Whatever works. It does all come down to whats in the frame.

With actors, use the adapters for CU's or dolly moves (if your using a dolly, you can use an adapter then), don't use the adapter on wide masters.

It's pretty common to change lenses and/or focal lenghts for different shots. And it's not uncommon to re-light a scene (or as I like to say, "Tweak" ) between different shots.

Nobody is saying you have to shoot your whole film, or scene even, with an adapter. It's just another tool.
 
In the end, only the footage remains. If it looks good, it looks good. Who cares how you acquired it. Making sure the shots are properly lit should be far more important. Audience doesn't want to know any technical jargon. Who cares. As long as the picture they are seeing is in focus and the content is entertaining; no one will mind the look.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top